Cricket match prediction discussions

[Sithara007]

Not regular players but the ones who gets drop and go back to domestic cricket.

Including young blood from domestic cricket. BCCI should identify 15-20 players and encourage them to play for 4 day cricket in SENA countries, Similar to Rahane, Ashwin, Ishant. India can rule the Test cricket for next 10-20 years easily if they get their shit together.

Despite some initiative taken a few years back, the vast majority of the domestic matches in India continues to be played on flat tracks, which benefits neither the batsmen, nor the bowlers. This is one of the reason why it is beneficial for the Indian players (especially those who are in the fringe for national team selection) to play domestic tournaments abroad. Right now the Sheffield Shield competition of Australia has the highest standard among all the tournaments, and the County Championship of England would be ranked as the second strongest competition.

[Vishnu.Reang]

It is a difficult position for India, the spinners are taken for runs in the past two matches from both teams and with high scoring games like these and heavy hitters who are able to put the ball out of the stadium, it is very difficult for the spinners as one loose ball and it will end up as a six and so is the reason the Indian spinners gave away 9 sixes in total in the last match.

Nowadays, the boundary distances in international matches have been decreased, to increase the number of boundaries. And this is having a disproportionately negative impact on the spin bowlers. Many of the boundaries during the Visakhapatnam match would have ended as wickets, if the match was played two decades ago. But it will be wring to say that it impacts one of the sides more than the other.

[SaShiRaJaVu]

Nowadays, the boundary distances in international matches have been decreased, to increase the number of boundaries. And this is having a disproportionately negative impact on the spin bowlers. Many of the boundaries during the Visakhapatnam match would have ended as wickets, if the match was played two decades ago. But it will be wring to say that it impacts one of the sides more than the other.

It is clear that the boundaries have become shorter in the past decade and when you see a mishit goes over the ropes we can understand the plight of the bowlers, the game has changed a lot and it helps the bowlers all the time even with the rules and regulation helping the batsman and on top of that the boundaries are shorter, tough times for bowlers and i do not see any change in that.

[JSRAW]

Not regular players but the ones who gets drop and go back to domestic cricket.

Including young blood from domestic cricket. BCCI should identify 15-20 players and encourage them to play for 4 day cricket in SENA countries, Similar to Rahane, Ashwin, Ishant. India can rule the Test cricket for next 10-20 years easily if they get their shit together.

Despite some initiative taken a few years back, the vast majority of the domestic matches in India continues to be played on flat tracks, which benefits neither the batsmen, nor the bowlers. This is one of the reason why it is beneficial for the Indian players (especially those who are in the fringe for national team selection) to play domestic tournaments abroad. Right now the Sheffield Shield competition of Australia has the highest standard among all the tournaments, and the County Championship of England would be ranked as the second strongest competition.

True for majority of games in domestic arena, i am not fan of this strategy. Some pitches are becoming pace friendly though but its not enough. some times i fancy the idea that, what will happen if BCCI try to create pitches according for foreign conditions ( England, Australia, South Africa) they have money, 50+ international cricket stadium and India is big, diverse when we look at weather.

[JohnBitCo]

Nowadays, the boundary distances in international matches have been decreased, to increase the number of boundaries. And this is having a disproportionately negative impact on the spin bowlers. Many of the boundaries during the Visakhapatnam match would have ended as wickets, if the match was played two decades ago. But it will be wring to say that it impacts one of the sides more than the other.

It is clear that the boundaries have become shorter in the past decade and when you see a mishit goes over the ropes we can understand the plight of the bowlers, the game has changed a lot and it helps the bowlers all the time even with the rules and regulation helping the batsman and on top of that the boundaries are shorter, tough times for bowlers and i do not see any change in that.

All the new rules of the cricket favors the batsmen. Single bouncer in an over, fielding restrictions and now short boundaries would mean more and more hitting and more runs. Cricket will more look like a baseball soon if this continues. I think this is bad for the cricket because we love the fast and spin good bowling spells and it does not matter if less runs are scored. But his pure hitting on every ball, is not looking good for the cricket in the long run.

[Vishnu.Reang]

True for majority of games in domestic arena, i am not fan of this strategy. Some pitches are becoming pace friendly though but its not enough. some times i fancy the idea that, what will happen if BCCI try to create pitches according for foreign conditions ( England, Australia, South Africa) they have money, 50+ international cricket stadium and India is big, diverse when we look at weather.

There are a number of pace-friendly pitches in India, including international tracks such as Mohali and Dharmashala. But the problem is that these grounds are with the smaller state boards and they get international games only once every two or three years. Apart from them, more than 90% of the tracks which are used for domestic games are either flat or spin-friendly.

[7788bitcoin]

There are a number of pace-friendly pitches in India, including international tracks such as Mohali and Dharmashala. But the problem is that these grounds are with the smaller state boards and they get international games only once every two or three years. Apart from them, more than 90% of the tracks which are used for domestic games are either flat or spin-friendly.

Not sure about pace friendly pitches in India but now they have good fast bowlers and every home series we expect a pitch that could help their bowlers and India never had good fast bowlers in the past as they solely depend on spinners but now there is a change in that concept and hence they can prepare green pitches too, no idea about the domestic tournaments and what wicket they are making as i am not following them.

[Juggy777]

There are a number of pace-friendly pitches in India, including international tracks such as Mohali and Dharmashala. But the problem is that these grounds are with the smaller state boards and they get international games only once every two or three years. Apart from them, more than 90% of the tracks which are used for domestic games are either flat or spin-friendly.

Not sure about pace friendly pitches in India but now they have good fast bowlers and every home series we expect a pitch that could help their bowlers and India never had good fast bowlers in the past as they solely depend on spinners but now there is a change in that concept and hence they can prepare green pitches too, no idea about the domestic tournaments and what wicket they are making as i am not following them.

@Vishnu.Reang I wasn’t aware that there were pitches in India that supported fast bowlers, because I had always seen them play on spin friendly pitches. @ 7788bitcoin I’ll second that as India had always relied on their spin bowlers more, but in recent years under Virat’s leadership they have focused more on fast bowlers and this decision has shown promising results for them don’t you think?.

https://www.hindustantimes.com/cricket/when-virat-took-over-ishant-sharma-explains-why-indian-bowlers-are-performing-better-under-kohli/story-iO44KPada72i9vT0bP9rGP.html

[ene1980]

All the new rules of the cricket favors the batsmen. Single bouncer in an over, fielding restrictions and now short boundaries would mean more and more hitting and more runs. Cricket will more look like a baseball soon if this continues. I think this is bad for the cricket because we love the fast and spin good bowling spells and it does not matter if less runs are scored. But his pure hitting on every ball, is not looking good for the cricket in the long run.

The rules that are changed by the ICC is because they need to attract the general audience while the cricket was lacking the audience they are expecting and the demands by the broadcasting partners and hence the ICC was forced to come up with rules that would aide the batsman and so is the reason we are seeing that there are more restrictions in a match and the boundaries are small than it was in the past, it is a commercial sport and all they look forward is to make money and the audience should change according to these public demand.

[Sithara007]

There are a number of pace-friendly pitches in India, including international tracks such as Mohali and Dharmashala. But the problem is that these grounds are with the smaller state boards and they get international games only once every two or three years. Apart from them, more than 90% of the tracks which are used for domestic games are either flat or spin-friendly.

Not sure about pace friendly pitches in India but now they have good fast bowlers and every home series we expect a pitch that could help their bowlers and India never had good fast bowlers in the past as they solely depend on spinners but now there is a change in that concept and hence they can prepare green pitches too, no idea about the domestic tournaments and what wicket they are making as i am not following them.

One thing that all of us tend to ignore is that the Indian pace bowlers have performed consistently on flat subcontinental surfaces in the recent times. The pace bowlers from visiting teams have struggled to bowl on such surfaces, but at the same time Indian bowlers such as Sharma and Shami have performed in an exemplary manner. And also, their average speed has increased. Earlier, they used to bowl in the low 130s, but now the average speed is around 140 kmph. I think that this has made the difference in flat surfaces.

[Clement Kaliyar]

@Vishnu.Reang I wasn’t aware that there were pitches in India that supported fast bowlers, because I had always seen them play on spin friendly pitches. @ 7788bitcoin I’ll second that as India had always relied on their spin bowlers more, but in recent years under Virat’s leadership they have focused more on fast bowlers and this decision has shown promising results for them don’t you think?

It is a true statement that India does have the best bowling line up in the history of Indian cricket as all these fast bowlers are capable of troubling any world class batsman around the world and especially when they travel abroad in green pitches they will be more potent if they are able to land the ball at the right areas and if the bowlers can sort their fitness issues then they have the best bowlers in world cricket.

[Vishnu.Reang]

It is a true statement that India does have the best bowling line up in the history of Indian cricket as all these fast bowlers are capable of troubling any world class batsman around the world and especially when they travel abroad in green pitches they will be more potent if they are able to land the ball at the right areas and if the bowlers can sort their fitness issues then they have the best bowlers in world cricket.

One advantage with the Indian bowling lineup is that they are not over-dependent on any one bowler. For example, when Jasprit Bumrah was injured recently, the other bowlers (Mohammad Shami, Ishant Sharma and Umesh Yadav) were able to step in and fill the vacuum. The same can't be said about the other teams. New Zealand looked pathetic when Trent Boult couldn't play because of injury. The same was the case with Australia, when Mitchell Starc was ruled out for most part of 2019.

[ene1980]

One advantage with the Indian bowling lineup is that they are not over-dependent on any one bowler. For example, when Jasprit Bumrah was injured recently, the other bowlers (Mohammad Shami, Ishant Sharma and Umesh Yadav) were able to step in and fill the vacuum. The same can't be said about the other teams. New Zealand looked pathetic when Trent Boult couldn't play because of injury. The same was the case with Australia, when Mitchell Starc was ruled out for most part of 2019.

I have one doubt why Ishant Sharma and Umesh Yadav are not part of ODI and T20 tournament for India as i have not seen them in the team even if Jasprit Bumrah was injured in the recent series and India was experimenting with new bowlers rather than picking Ishant Sharma nor Umesh Yadav. In the case of Mitchell Starc he was not playing in the Ashes because the selectors thought he was not that important in the Test and when he was given an opportunity after that he bowled really well and now he is a pick in the Test format.

[Sithara007]

I have one doubt why Ishant Sharma and Umesh Yadav are not part of ODI and T20 tournament for India as i have not seen them in the team even if Jasprit Bumrah was injured in the recent series and India was experimenting with new bowlers rather than picking Ishant Sharma nor Umesh Yadav. In the case of Mitchell Starc he was not playing in the Ashes because the selectors thought he was not that important in the Test and when he was given an opportunity after that he bowled really well and now he is a pick in the Test format.

Perhaps the selectors want to limit the bowlers such as Sharma/Shami/Yadav to test matches, and for some of the important ODI matches. For some time now, they have been experimenting with inexperienced bowlers for the T20 format. Shardul Thakur, Khaleel Ahmed, Mohammed Siraj, Deepak Chahar and Navdeep Saini are some of the pacers who got the opportunity recently. But none of them could perform consistently against the top sides.

[vella85]

The Australian summer cricket series is strange this year as now that all the test matches are over, Australia now travel to India for a ODI series and then travel to South Africa for a T20 and ODI series and then come back to Australia to play New Zealand in an ODI series. And after all this they then travel to New Zealand to play in a T20 series and all this in just 2 months which is crazy. I've never seen anything like this as the Australian summer ends at the end of February so it doesn't make sense to me. 

[Sithara007]

The Australian summer cricket series is strange this year as now that all the test matches are over, Australia now travel to India for a ODI series and then travel to South Africa for a T20 and ODI series and then come back to Australia to play New Zealand in an ODI series. And after all this they then travel to New Zealand to play in a T20 series and all this in just 2 months which is crazy. I've never seen anything like this as the Australian summer ends at the end of February so it doesn't make sense to me. 

Earlier, test matches used to be mandatory for any bilateral series. But now the priority is being given to T20 matches, as they suit both the sides (the players as well as the board). A few years ago, a typical tour would have included anywhere from 3 to 5 test matches and a bilateral or triangular ODI tournament. But now T20 matches have become more frequent and the number of test matches have gone down. People don't have time to watch test matches and therefore the boards don't earn much if they schedule too many test matches.

[Vishnu.Reang]

I have one doubt why Ishant Sharma and Umesh Yadav are not part of ODI and T20 tournament for India as i have not seen them in the team even if Jasprit Bumrah was injured in the recent series and India was experimenting with new bowlers rather than picking Ishant Sharma nor Umesh Yadav. In the case of Mitchell Starc he was not playing in the Ashes because the selectors thought he was not that important in the Test and when he was given an opportunity after that he bowled really well and now he is a pick in the Test format.

My guess is that the selectors want them to play Ranji Trophy (4-day domestic competition in India) instead of the T20 series against Sri Lanka. They want to make sure that these players remain 100% fit for the longer format. For the shorter format, they have so many options (Shardul, Saini, Khaleel.etc), but that is not the case with the test format.

[7788bitcoin]

Earlier, test matches used to be mandatory for any bilateral series. But now the priority is being given to T20 matches, as they suit both the sides (the players as well as the board). A few years ago, a typical tour would have included anywhere from 3 to 5 test matches and a bilateral or triangular ODI tournament. But now T20 matches have become more frequent and the number of test matches have gone down. People don't have time to watch test matches and therefore the boards don't earn much if they schedule too many test matches.

With the T20 world cup coming up it is quite natural that all the cricket boards are preferring T20 matches in their bilateral series and it shows that all the teams are really looking forward to send the best team for the world cup and it is fascinating because of the commercial success T20 had after its inception and many small teams are coming up because of the T20 format in the past ten years .

[ene1980]

~snip
My guess is that the selectors want them to play Ranji Trophy (4-day domestic competition in India) instead of the T20 series against Sri Lanka. They want to make sure that these players remain 100% fit for the longer format. For the shorter format, they have so many options (Shardul, Saini, Khaleel.etc), but that is not the case with the test format.

The concept of using different batsman for different format is possible according to the skill level of a player but if you are differentiating bowlers according to different format and that too fast bowlers this is the first instance i am seeing because if a player is able to perform well in Test they can perform the same in other formats too, may be India has more players and the competition is high and may be because of that players like Ishant Sharma and Umesh Yadav are not in the shorter format .

[pakhitheboss]

~snip
My guess is that the selectors want them to play Ranji Trophy (4-day domestic competition in India) instead of the T20 series against Sri Lanka. They want to make sure that these players remain 100% fit for the longer format. For the shorter format, they have so many options (Shardul, Saini, Khaleel.etc), but that is not the case with the test format.

The concept of using different batsman for different format is possible according to the skill level of a player but if you are differentiating bowlers according to different format and that too fast bowlers this is the first instance i am seeing because if a player is able to perform well in Test they can perform the same in other formats too, may be India has more players and the competition is high and may be because of that players like Ishant Sharma and Umesh Yadav are not in the shorter format .

With India batsmen were never an issue, it is the bowlers that they might want to test. Bowlers tend to suffer a lot from injuries and the best way to test them will be playing them in a longer format. I agree ranji matches are the best source of  finding those talents.